Jump to content


What you think of ranked battles?

ranked

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

Poll: What you think of ranked battles? (66 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

Ranked battles is:

  1. Great (3 votes [4.55%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.55%

  2. ok (18 votes [27.27%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.27%

  3. Bad (23 votes [34.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 34.85%

  4. PURE RAGE (22 votes [33.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

Vote Hide poll

kaneAAA #1 Posted 04 August 2018 - 12:03 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38021 battles
  • 1,641
  • [SKRAP] SKRAP
  • Member since:
    11-18-2012
Played it today did quite well got up to first shielded rank and then endless losses about 20 in a row, lucky to retain my rank then but it felt rigged to lose a bunch after a few pleasing games up until that rank. Mainly play my lt-100 and some others. It seems intensely frustrating most of the time, in your opinion does it work well?

Jigabachi #2 Posted 04 August 2018 - 12:12 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17858 battles
  • 18,505
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
If I'll happen to be in the mood to play a few matches of tanks over the next two weeks, I might try it. People wrote that reaching the first few ranks leads to some nice matches with a lot less botlevel players, so that might be worth a try.
Not interested in the higher levels at all, though. I'd expect lots of padding...

fighting_falcon93 #3 Posted 04 August 2018 - 01:58 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 29733 battles
  • 3,432
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

The game mode itself is quite enjoyable but then we have these -------- --------, a.k.a. the "special people", that simply can't participate without spamming their stupid high skill multi-purpose clown ammo or lobbing shells from the edge of the map in their casino machines. If WG could finally pull themselves together and rework the stupid premium ammo I think this game mode would be much more enjoyable. Finally the ones with their backside filled with fort knoxes would need to learn to play properly without their mandatory skill ammo. Would be interesting to see how that turns out. I have no doubt that they'll still be very good players, but I don't get it why they need to waste so much credits if they really are as good as they want to seem.

 

But as it stands today, I voted "pure rage". WG holds the record so far, 2-3 battles and I'm so triggered that I could throw my computer out from the window...



TheOneAboveAII #4 Posted 04 August 2018 - 02:06 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13145 battles
  • 488
  • [S4LT] S4LT
  • Member since:
    07-14-2016
ranked battles? well...if it weren't for the russian balanced tanks, the japanese bunker of stupidity and the "official ranked battles standard ammo"...plus arty...but eh...i leave that out...quite enjoyable...but considering that what i just listed out is in basically 100% of the matches...unless you play one of those and shoot the "official ranked battles standard ammo"...you can go and f yourself

FAME_skill4ltu #5 Posted 04 August 2018 - 02:09 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 29903 battles
  • 997
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    09-23-2012
it would be a good mode if only winning gets rewarded and not just playing for top xp

marepbc #6 Posted 04 August 2018 - 02:44 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 57466 battles
  • 67
  • Member since:
    12-02-2011

XP distribution is wrong. Sniping damage xp gain is overnerfed. Best way to earn xp is take a heavy with good turret armor, go to first nearest brawl and pray that the rest of your team is gonna cover your behind/win other flank. By just sitting in the brawl area you are getting the highest xp gain.

Because of the wrong xp distribution, lots of the games are just imbecilic to the max. :facepalm:


Edited by marepbc, 04 August 2018 - 02:45 AM.


NUKLEAR_SLUG #7 Posted 04 August 2018 - 04:37 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27512 battles
  • 1,966
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View PostFAME_skill4ltu, on 04 August 2018 - 02:09 AM, said:

it would be a good mode if only winning gets rewarded and not just playing for top xp

 

Agreed, someone can do hardly any damage all game but cap out the enemy and they'll get no chevron even tho they basically won the game for their team.

 

If the goal is to win then everyone should get rewarded for winning whether they were up front fighting, sniping from a mile away or just capped out.



Argedeava #8 Posted 04 August 2018 - 05:20 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 28860 battles
  • 512
  • [WODR] WODR
  • Member since:
    10-02-2013

They pop up the failure of gamebalance due to gold ammo.

Trying to balance anything arround 2 points of refference and hoping it will turn out allright is dumb.

It is obvious that it affects the gameplay more towards extemes: lights and heavies, that`s why mediums are the most used, while artillery is on a league of its own.



Bennie182 #9 Posted 04 August 2018 - 08:51 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 51515 battles
  • 1,279
  • [WGL-A] WGL-A
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

View PostFAME_skill4ltu, on 04 August 2018 - 02:09 AM, said:

it would be a good mode if only winning gets rewarded and not just playing for top xp

how ironic that a player like you says so.. :facepalm:



Beltalowda #10 Posted 04 August 2018 - 08:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 60216 battles
  • 685
  • Member since:
    03-02-2011

View PostFAME_skill4ltu, on 04 August 2018 - 01:09 AM, said:

it would be a good mode if only winning gets rewarded and not just playing for top xp

 

I kinda agree and disagree with you in the same time. On one hand I see too much stupid stuff in Ranked, like two or three tanks drive all the way around the map uncontested just to ignore the enemy cap, even if it would mean a certain win. And then there is the thing when your team just melts away and you keep getting them over and over again so it's nice to at least not lose a chevron or even gain one, because you do well on the losing team.

 

I don't know how to fix it, but nothing in life is perfect and we must do with what we've got.



FAME_skill4ltu #11 Posted 04 August 2018 - 09:32 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 29903 battles
  • 997
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    09-23-2012

View PostBeltalowda, on 04 August 2018 - 07:59 AM, said:

 

I kinda agree and disagree with you in the same time. On one hand I see too much stupid stuff in Ranked, like two or three tanks drive all the way around the map uncontested just to ignore the enemy cap, even if it would mean a certain win. And then there is the thing when your team just melts away and you keep getting them over and over again so it's nice to at least not lose a chevron or even gain one, because you do well on the losing team.

 

I don't know how to fix it, but nothing in life is perfect and we must do with what we've got.

 

that is the reason why only winning should get rewarded. people would have to play like a team and not like now were u just follow the lemmingtrain and do ur dmg

Beltalowda #12 Posted 04 August 2018 - 09:49 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 60216 battles
  • 685
  • Member since:
    03-02-2011

View PostFAME_skill4ltu, on 04 August 2018 - 08:32 AM, said:

 

that is the reason why only winning should get rewarded. people would have to play like a team and not like now were u just follow the lemmingtrain and do ur dmg

 

The truth is, it is not really tactical team display when yes those lemming trains just wonder off to the farthest corner of the map ignoring base, other flanks and generally just trying to fire and do dmg at least 5-6 times in order to be either top ten or top 5 on a losing team. After all this game mode was designed for a skill gameplay and that should involve tactical thinking and cooperation as well.

 

Take an example Tundra, lemming train is heading of to the hill area, you know what I mean, but if your team sends some fast heavy tanks around the flank where is literally no one to oppose them, then they got behind them and game is over. Taking shots from the front, behind and a flank equals game lost. Tundra is a quite small map, may I add. 

 

There is no point in trying to defend this area on your own, the only thing it does is lowering your chances to gain a chevron. How is this a cooperative gameplay when one is trying to help his/her team to win and they get shifted to lower end of the xp table ?

 

Also, even when I my self play arta at times, I would not allow arty to take a part in this mode. 


Edited by Beltalowda, 04 August 2018 - 09:52 AM.


Homer_J #13 Posted 04 August 2018 - 09:53 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 27652 battles
  • 29,000
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

Voted OK but would have liked a "meh" option.

 

The time restrictions are a killer for me anyway but even without those I find randoms more fun.



Dikkeh0nd #14 Posted 04 August 2018 - 10:08 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 19751 battles
  • 100
  • [E-BAY] E-BAY
  • Member since:
    12-29-2012

View PostBeltalowda, on 04 August 2018 - 09:49 AM, said:

 

The truth is, it is not really tactical team display when yes those lemming trains just wonder off to the farthest corner of the map ignoring base, other flanks and generally just trying to fire and do dmg at least 5-6 times in order to be either top ten or top 5 on a losing team. After all this game mode was designed for a skill gameplay and that should involve tactical thinking and cooperation as well.

 

Take an example Tundra, lemming train is heading of to the hill area, you know what I mean, but if your team sends some fast heavy tanks around the flank where is literally no one to oppose them, then they got behind them and game is over. Taking shots from the front, behind and a flank equals game lost. Tundra is a quite small map, may I add. 

 

There is no point in trying to defend this area on your own, the only thing it does is lowering your chances to gain a chevron. How is this a cooperative gameplay when one is trying to help his/her team to win and they get shifted to lower end of the xp table ?

 

Also, even when I my self play arta at times, I would not allow arty to take a part in this mode. 

This is exactly my problem with ranked, People dont work as a team. They are only making sure they get the XP needed to progress, and they do it at any cost.

Tundra might be the best example of this kind of "teamplay" idd.



SlyMeerkat #15 Posted 04 August 2018 - 10:47 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15823 battles
  • 1,946
  • [FILO] FILO
  • Member since:
    01-29-2013
Missed option "Avoided" as i have and the same for previous..... Randoms is more fun :)

Bennie182 #16 Posted 04 August 2018 - 12:17 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 51515 battles
  • 1,279
  • [WGL-A] WGL-A
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012

View PostSlyMeerkat, on 04 August 2018 - 10:47 AM, said:

Missed option "Avoided" as i have and the same for previous..... Randoms is more fun :)

randoms deliver even more idi**s #facepalm



Hellfoxe #17 Posted 04 August 2018 - 05:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22694 battles
  • 511
  • [AKIN] AKIN
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

View PostkaneAAA, on 04 August 2018 - 12:03 AM, said:

Played it today did quite well got up to first shielded rank and then endless losses about 20 in a row, lucky to retain my rank then but it felt rigged to lose a bunch after a few pleasing games up until that rank. Mainly play my lt-100 and some others. It seems intensely frustrating most of the time, in your opinion does it work well?

 

Ranked battles is very bad depend on the hour you play. It seems the last two hours you should have better teams since must noobs tomatoes go to sleep around that hour.

DeBanus #18 Posted 04 August 2018 - 05:29 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28690 battles
  • 221
  • [-NARF] -NARF
  • Member since:
    11-19-2011

Ranked is Wargamings prize-winner fail of many failed attempts to "fix" their game.

Today i saw a picture on the forum of a Type 5 being #1st in EXP with 2 shots fired.

Also today i did ~3,000 damage on Malinovka and ended #12th on EXP (#3rd on damage)

 

Their attempt to make ranked "less camping" is completly overdone (like always) and makes playing Light, Arty or TD just not worth it in Ranked at all.

For those who do not own a: Type 5 / WZ 111-5 / Super Conq, like me, are *edited* Ranked atm.

 

GG Wargaming, keep up the good work!


Edited by NickMustaine, 05 August 2018 - 03:32 PM.
Inappropriate remarks


Lord_Barbarozza #19 Posted 04 August 2018 - 06:45 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 6031 battles
  • 86
  • Member since:
    03-22-2015

Besides being unlucky on top of having bad battles ARTY and HEAT is believe it or not ruining Ranked battles too. I only got T110e5, I almost reached rank 7 without using any premium ammo(which I never use anyway, wont lose my honor, credits is not a problem).

 

Perhaps remove ARTY from ranked, then remove premium ammo, then do something about Type 5 heavy which not only has armor, but a stupid gun which easily splashes my E5(which is well armored) for 500 damage. Seriously, Type 5 heavy is a turreted, HE/premium ammo shooting artillery with lots of armor, it only misses 1 thing, that is the special artillery bird view to loop shells into tanks behind cover or splash your tank for the same damage T110e5 deals on a penetrating shot. No, most of the times I cannot flank Type 5 because he has teammates with a gun too.

 

Triple the cost of premium ammo and I dont care who wastes their credits, or half the premium damage and I will at least survive a bit longer.

Ranked is not about who is the most skilled, but it is who is the most skilled using premium ammo.

Otherwise the ranked system seems to be a nice alternative to random battles giving you rewards.



Bordhaw #20 Posted 04 August 2018 - 07:24 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10827 battles
  • 1,973
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017
Meh, people play a few battles and lose interest as it's boring. 





Also tagged with ranked

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users